• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

[W:#23,579]Ukraine War Thread

JANFU said:
Was reading, yes I know, on Twitter. Posted that Ru was using this a a dorm for soldiers.
It the hosp was in use, does it not lose its protection under The Geneva Convention/Laws of war
Do mistakes happen certainly do, but was it good or bad Intel?
Ukraine would not deliberately target a hosp.
Click to expand...
Russia routinely uses protected locations for military operations - yes, itself a war crime. That way the enemy has two choices: leave the target alone, or blow it up and have a propaganda disaster. Remember when they blew up their own POW camp just to cover up the torture of prisoners? They have no compunction about war crime on a massive scale. Who's going to stop them?
 
NWRatCon said:
Russia routinely uses protected locations for military operations - yes, itself a war crime. That way the enemy has two choices: leave the target alone, or blow it up and have a propaganda disaster. Remember when they blew up their own POW camp just to cover up the torture of prisoners? They have no compunction about war crime on a massive scale. Who's going to stop them?
Click to expand...

Exactly. I think that russia's history under putin demonstrates that putin views treaties and memoranda and so forth as a sign of weakness or gullibility, agreements to be followed only as long as they benefit russia and quickly discarded when they don't.

In other words, I believe that putin's russia only enters into treaties and international agreements because they limit other countries.

Once those agreements actively limit russia, russia ignores them.

Western behavior reinforces putin's belief system. Despite his repeated violations of these treaties and memoranda, the west continues to negotiate with putin via treaty.

I'd be content if the United States diplomatically ignored russia forevermore henceforth and reduced its diplomatic mission to a skeleton crew of two or three: a diplomat, a guard, and someone to get them both coffee, because **** putin.
 
Yakshi said:
Exactly. I think that russia's history under putin demonstrates that putin views treaties and memoranda and so forth as a sign of weakness or gullibility, agreements to be followed only as long as they benefit russia and quickly discarded when they don't.

In other words, I believe that putin's russia only enters into treaties and international agreements because they limit other countries.

Once those agreements actively limit russia, russia ignores them.

Western behavior reinforces putin's belief system. Despite his repeated violations of these treaties and memoranda, the west continues to negotiate with putin via treaty.

I'd be content if the United States diplomatically ignored russia forevermore henceforth and reduced its diplomatic mission to a skeleton crew of two or three: a diplomat, a guard, and someone to get them both coffee, because **** putin.
Click to expand...

Every time I read certain posters saying Ukraine should negotiate for peace and it's all the fault of the West that Russian invaded and has destroyed half of Ukraine - I think they should read this post.

Not that it will make them see the lies in what they have been posting so far or force them to rethink but it's worth a try
 
Chomsky said:
The good news? "The West" is supplying 321 tanks to UKR.
The bad news? No info on the time-table!
www.cnn.com

West to deliver 321 tanks to Ukraine, says diplomat, as North Korea accuses US of 'crossing the red line' | CNN

Western countries will deliver more than 300 tanks to Ukraine, Kyiv's ambassador to France said Friday.
www.cnn.com www.cnn.com
Click to expand...
An excellent source is Gen. Mark Hertling, former USAREUR and former commander of the 1st Armored Division (a.k.a. "First Tank"):

"While hopeful proclamation, right now I don’t see those kinds of promises. I’m seeing potential for 100-150 in the short term."

Per Hertling, Abrams tanks will take at least 8 months to deploy, and that would be "lightning speed."

Elsewhere he said we might see advanced tanks from other nations, which require much less logistics support, as early as March. Maybe.
 
Yakshi said:
Exactly. I think that russia's history under putin demonstrates that putin views treaties and memoranda and so forth as a sign of weakness or gullibility, agreements to be followed only as long as they benefit russia and quickly discarded when they don't.

In other words, I believe that putin's russia only enters into treaties and international agreements because they limit other countries.

Once those agreements actively limit russia, russia ignores them.

Western behavior reinforces putin's belief system. Despite his repeated violations of these treaties and memoranda, the west continues to negotiate with putin via treaty.

I'd be content if the United States diplomatically ignored russia forevermore henceforth and reduced its diplomatic mission to a skeleton crew of two or three: a diplomat, a guard, and someone to get them both coffee, because **** putin.
Click to expand...
You're not alone.

Opinion | How Not to Negotiate with Russia (Politico)​

 

At the Pentagon, push to send F-16s to Ukraine picks up steam (Politico)​

A contingent of military officials is quietly pushing the Pentagon to approve sending F-16 fighter jets to Ukraine to help the country defend itself from Russian missile and drone attacks, according to three people with knowledge of the discussions.

Ukraine has kept American-made F-16s on its weapons wish list since the Russian invasion last year. But Washington and Kyiv have viewed artillery, armor and ground-based air defense systems as more urgent needs as Ukraine seeks to protect civilian infrastructure and claw back ground occupied by Russian forces.

In my view, what has characterized the entire west's approach to the conflict is a different perception of urgency. Ukraine, being the invaded party and bearing the brunt of the violation, feels legitimately quite urgent in its needs - everything, all at once, as quickly as possible - and has only one adversay. The West, on the other hand, is not immediately impacted (except economically), so it perceives the threat differently. Frankly, I am appalled at their behavior, but it is a complicated endeavor. Years of fiscal neglect have left their militaries unprepared and their economic bases under-resourced. They are just catching up, ramping up weapon production, cutting connections, and recognizing that the west is at war.
 
www.themoscowtimes.com

Trial of Russian Artist for Anti-War Supermarket Protest Begins - The Moscow Times

The trial of Russian artist Sasha Skochilenko, who was arrested in April for an anti-war protest in which she replaced supermarket price tags with information about the death toll in Ukraine, opened at a St.
www.themoscowtimes.com www.themoscowtimes.com

meduza.io

‘They ripped out the tooth but said they couldn’t sew up her gum’ The girlfriend of Sasha Skochilenko, the first person in Russia to face felony charges for ‘spreading disinfo’ about the military,’ describes her case — Meduza

On April 13, a court in St. Petersburg jailed artist Sasha Skochilenko for replacing price tags at a local grocery store with stickers bearing anti-war messages. Skochilenko stands accused of the felony offense of spreading “disinformation” about the Russian military. Meduza spoke to her...
meduza.io meduza.io
 
NWRatCon said:

At the Pentagon, push to send F-16s to Ukraine picks up steam (Politico)​

A contingent of military officials is quietly pushing the Pentagon to approve sending F-16 fighter jets to Ukraine to help the country defend itself from Russian missile and drone attacks, according to three people with knowledge of the discussions.

Ukraine has kept American-made F-16s on its weapons wish list since the Russian invasion last year. But Washington and Kyiv have viewed artillery, armor and ground-based air defense systems as more urgent needs as Ukraine seeks to protect civilian infrastructure and claw back ground occupied by Russian forces.

In my view, what has characterized the entire west's approach to the conflict is a different perception of urgency. Ukraine, being the invaded party and bearing the brunt of the violation, feels legitimately quite urgent in its needs - everything, all at once, as quickly as possible - and has only one adversay. The West, on the other hand, is not immediately impacted (except economically), so it perceives the threat differently. Frankly, I am appalled at their behavior, but it is a complicated endeavor. Years of fiscal neglect have left their militaries unprepared and their economic bases under-resourced. They are just catching up, ramping up weapon production, cutting connections, and recognizing that the west is at war.
Click to expand...

I don't know a lot of things about a lot of things, and the feasibility of the F-16 in Ukraine is one of them.

Can Ukrainians fly them? If they need training, how long would something like that take?

How much of a game changer would they be?

Would russia have an effective counter?

I'm not asking you specifically. Just thinking out loud.
 
Yakshi said:
I don't know a lot of things about a lot of things, and the feasibility of the F-16 in Ukraine is one of them.

Can Ukrainians fly them? If they need training, how long would something like that take?

How much of a game changer would they be?

Would russia have an effective counter?

I'm not asking you specifically. Just thinking out loud.
Click to expand...
I don't see F15/16's in Ukraine till after the war is over.
Ru has significant AD and no one controls the airspace. F15s etc would not be able to perform close air support due to RU AD.
They would need modifications to land on rougher surfaces which from what I understand the Mig's were designed with that ability. Smooth dirt runways

Accidentally crossing the border into Russia is also another issue that could arise and spark an International incident, and Putin is looking for 1
As for training, it would be long & intensive. Maintenance training will take quite some time. Years in fact. US Crew Chiefs in charge of maintaining an AC have years if not decades of experience. Hard to cram that all in over a short time
What Ukraine needs now is much artillery/tanks/AFV/cluster munitions/GLSDB which have a 150 Ks max range & can fire in a 360 deg radius. Yes they can shoot front, left, center and behind.. Add all the heavy kit from bridge layers to mine clearance vehicles and more for a successful offensive
Just my opinion
aviation.stackexchange.com

How are modern jets modified to takeoff/land on a dirt runway?

I've been reading a lot about the Soviet and Russian military aircraft, and it seems a lot of them are built to work on dirt runways, or modified to do so. How is this accomplished? Is it a simple...
aviation.stackexchange.com aviation.stackexchange.com
 
Yakshi said:
I don't know a lot of things about a lot of things, and the feasibility of the F-16 in Ukraine is one of them.

Can Ukrainians fly them? If they need training, how long would something like that take?

How much of a game changer would they be?

Would russia have an effective counter?

I'm not asking you specifically. Just thinking out loud.
Click to expand...
I'm an army guy, but I've done some research on that. The 50 Ukrainian pilots who have been selected are all experienced combat veterans familiar with high-powered aircraft. They are all proficient in English. I have seen estimates that they can be brought up to speed on the F-16 in about 60 days. More important is the change in strategy that American pilots employ.

Ukrainians have been involved in training on that since 2011, anticipating joining NATO for some time. There have been two joint exercises between Ukrainian and American Air Forces (and other NATO allies) in 2011 and 2018. Their General Staff, moreover, have been inculcated with Western strategic ideas since the disaster of 2014. They have employed many of those strategies in their counteroffensive and their initial defense.

And a significant portion of their NCO Corps are already familiar with NATO tactics. "Tens of thousands of Ukrainian soldiers have received training since 2014, and that pace has accelerated following Russia's unprovoked invasion in February. U.S. service members are providing Ukrainian soldiers with training on various weapons systems that we're providing to Ukraine," [Pentagon Press Secretary Air Force Brig. Gen. Pat] Ryder said. This includes maintenance and logistics training to ensure the systems stay operational, he said. This is a continuation of the training the Ukraine military has received since Russia first invaded the nation in 2014,"

Russian air combat follows the same basic pattern as Russian ground combat - very heavily command-centric, with little initiative allowed to the fighting forces.
 
Yakshi said:
I don't know a lot of things about a lot of things, and the feasibility of the F-16 in Ukraine is one of them.
Click to expand...
Guess we have that in common. Not afraid to ask
 
JANFU said:
I don't see F15/16's in Ukraine till after the war is over.
Ru has significant AD and no one controls the airspace. F15s etc would not be able to perform close air support due to RU AD.
They would need modifications to land on rougher surfaces which from what I understand the Mig's were designed with that ability. Smooth dirt runways

Accidentally crossing the border into Russia is also another issue that could arise and spark an International incident, and Putin is looking for 1
As for training, it would be long & intensive. Maintenance training will take quite some time. Years in fact. US Crew Chiefs in charge of maintaining an AC have years if not decades of experience. Hard to cram that all in over a short time
What Ukraine needs now is much artillery/tanks/AFV/cluster munitions/GLSDB which have a 150 Ks max range & can fire in a 360 deg radius. Yes they can shoot front, left, center and behind.. Add all the heavy kit from bridge layers to mine clearance vehicles and more for a successful offensive
Just my opinion
aviation.stackexchange.com

How are modern jets modified to takeoff/land on a dirt runway?

I've been reading a lot about the Soviet and Russian military aircraft, and it seems a lot of them are built to work on dirt runways, or modified to do so. How is this accomplished? Is it a simple...
aviation.stackexchange.com aviation.stackexchange.com
Click to expand...
I agree that the logistics end of deployment of Western aircraft is going to be the biggest obstacle. Not only the landing areas required, but maintenance. Much more complicated than training the pilots.
 
NWRatCon said:
I agree that the logistics end of deployment of Western aircraft is going to be the biggest obstacle. Not only the landing areas required, but maintenance.
Click to expand...
A lot more complicated than a tank or artillery.
 
JANFU said:
A lot more complicated than a tank or artillery.
Click to expand...
US planners are not expecting this war to end in 2023. They are planning for Ukraine's eventual integration into NATO, so are sprinkling weapon systems and tactics throughout the Ukrainian military. It's a multi-year program, but it is not quick or simple. We're talking 2025-26.

I'm no longer connected to any active peers in Operations planning. They're mostly retired, like me. But I am familiar with the short and long term processes from 10 years in Operations.
 
US-educated foreign soldiers learn ‘democratic values,’ study shows – though America also trains future dictators (The Conversation)

"Training foreign military personnel became part of the United States’ global military strategy to achieve its foreign policy goals during World War II, along with a robust program of weapons and equipment sales. Today, the U.S. Armed Forces run 14 programs in over 150 countries, providing education and training for roughly 70,000 foreign military personnel of all ranks each year, both in the U.S. and overseas.

According to the International Security Assistance and Arms Export Control Act, passed in 1976 and amended in 1978 and 1991, these programs aim to transmit the U.S. military’s professional values and norms – namely respect of democratic values, human rights and civilian control of the armed forces. They also seek to professionalize and strengthen the armed forces of recipient countries."
....
"I found military personnel who have served under a U.S.-trained commander to have higher respect for democratic values, human rights and civilian control than those who have never served under a U.S.-trained commander.

This knowledge transfer may explain my next finding, that U.S. military training helps countries keep the peace."
....
My research establishes, possibly for the first time, that U.S. military training programs achieve their stated goals: They transmit democratic values to foreign soldiers, who spread them among national armed forces.

However, it does not conclude that American military education is an unmitigated good. Far from it.

U.S. foreign military training has produced more democratic commanders, better-trained warlords and everything in between."
 

Expanded U.S. training for Ukraine forces begins in Germany (NPR)​

BRUSSELS (AP) — The U.S. military's new, expanded combat training of Ukrainian forces began in Germany on Sunday, with a goal of getting a battalion of about 500 troops back on the battlefield to fight the Russians in the next five to eight weeks, said Gen. Mark Milley, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

Milley, who plans to visit the Grafenwoehr training area on Monday to get a first-hand look at the program, said the troops being trained left Ukraine a few days ago. In Germany is a full set of weapons and equipment for them to use.

Until now the Pentagon had declined to say exactly when the training would start.

The so-called combined arms training is aimed at honing the skills of the Ukrainian forces so they will be better prepared to launch an offensive or counter any surge in Russian attacks. They will learn how to better move and coordinate their company- and battalion-size units in battle, using combined artillery, armor and ground forces.

Speaking to two reporters traveling with him to Europe on Sunday, Milley said the complex training — combined with an array of new weapons, artillery, tanks and other vehicles heading to Ukraine — will be key to helping the country's forces take back territory that has been captured by Russia in the nearly 11-month-old war.
 
jpn said:
An excellent source is Gen. Mark Hertling, former USAREUR and former commander of the 1st Armored Division (a.k.a. "First Tank"):

"While hopeful proclamation, right now I don’t see those kinds of promises. I’m seeing potential for 100-150 in the short term."

Per Hertling, Abrams tanks will take at least 8 months to deploy, and that would be "lightning speed."

Elsewhere he said we might see advanced tanks from other nations, which require much less logistics support, as early as March. Maybe.
Click to expand...

Lately, I'm constantly getting a feeling of "too little, too late". We're letting this deteriorate into a humanitarian disaster beyond comprehension.

(thank you for your links)
 
NWRatCon said:
US planners are not expecting this war to end in 2023. They are planning for Ukraine's eventual integration into NATO, so are sprinkling weapon systems and tactics throughout the Ukrainian military. It's a multi-year program, but it is not quick or simple. We're talking 2025-26.

I'm no longer connected to any active peers in Operations planning. They're mostly retired, like me. But I am familiar with the short and long term processes from 10 years in Operations.
Click to expand...
I agree the war will run into 24 at least. Barring a coup/Russian military collapse in Ukraine
Reason why artillery and other kit will be sent, but the companies need contracts.
Example is Germany, company that makes their tanks can increase 155 production up to to 450/500 K per year.
Requires purchasing a powder factory, Govt assistance on that needed.
But as the Chairperson said, they need funding & orders.

Ukraine firing 3 K per day - 1 year approx 1.1 M shells.
As Ukraine is at a disadvantage on artillery/ammo, production lines needs to be sped up
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom